iRudhi vaarththai - a poem by Cheran
M. Sundaramoorthy
the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
only two kind: (1) Poetry (kavidhai) and (2) non-poetry (kavidhai
allaadhadhu (or) akavidhai). Who has to decide that?. In my opinion,
only time will decide that. Can we keep waiting till then?. We have to
come to our own judgements, based on our knowledge. We have to keep
reading more and more. More we read better will be our judgement.
So it will be a good idea to share the poetry we are familiar with,
even as we discuss, "what is poetry?".
=================
iRudhi vaarththai
=================
inRu
mayirizhaiyil aadik koNdirukkiRadhu
vaazhvu.
kurudhi koppuLiththup
piravaagam edukkum kaNgaLudan
maraNaththin padai veerargaL
endha nEramum varalaam
kuruttu visuvaasamuLLa
murattup pOrkkuNaththukkum
murattu visuvaasamuLLa
kuruttup pOrkkuNaththukkum
nanRi.
manidham uruvazhigaiyil
mounath thiraiyiRakki
nishtai koodudhal
kaviNYanukku appaarpattadhu
pEsugiRa kaviNYan oru kaNNivedi
pEsaadhavan piRagu
piraLayamaavaan!
vaazhvu.
kaaRRoru thuLiyum
kadaloru pidiyum
puNarndhu piRandha nurai alla
enpadhai
ellOrum uNara vENdum
mElum iraththam eppOdhum sivappu alla;
uRaindha piRagu
kaRuppu enpadhaiyum.
nallavai, allavai
ellaavaRRaiyum theeyilidum
oru kaNmoodiththanamaana vELvikku
vEdha mandhira gOsham muzhanga
ella idangaLilirundhum
varugiRadhu kaaLaan.
natpum
nEsamum
niyaayamum
nuzhaiya mudiyaamal
uRaindha paruththi aadaigaLukkuLLum
dhatiththa mudhalaith thOlukkuLLum
iruNdu kidakkinRa
idhayaththin aRaigaLukkuL
engaavadhu oru moolaikku
eriyum en sidhai
oru siRu veLichcham tharattum
andha veLichchaththilirundhu
oru paadal piRakkum
veeram vaLaindhu sindhappadaadha
iraththaththin kaRai padindha
karangaLaal
kuzhandhagaLai, kavidhagaLai
malargaLaith thodaamal...
- Cheran
[From: 'kaalachchuvadu' siRappu malar, 1991: Nagekoil.
Ed. Sundara Ramswamy]
Note about Cheran: He is a young Eelam poet. His poems are simple,
but penetrating. As we read his poetry, we can feel that he is
directly talking to us. His poetry is mostly concerned with the
existential problem of humanity in his country. He is son of the
famous Eelam poet Mahakavi. His published works include:
(1). Yaman
(2). sooriyanukku pin pakkam
(3). elumbukkoddugaLin oorvalam
[The first two are published in Tamil Nadu, India and the third one
in Canada]
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
> The proposal of 'kavidhaip pOtti' ended in the crisis now - we got into
> the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
> the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
I honestly differ. The first requirement for understanding
poetry is to understand the mysterious relationship between
form and content !!! Neither the content nor the form
by itself is sufficient for a good poetry, but togather yes.
Feeling is indeed enshrined in the relationship between the
form and content.
> only two kind: (1) Poetry (kavidhai) and (2) non-poetry (kavidhai
^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> allaadhadhu (or) akavidhai). Who has to decide that?. In my opinion,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This sounds rather silly to me [ no offense meant]
You are saying 'as far as poetry is concerned, there can be
only two kinds..' and one of them is non-poetry ??!!
It does not make any sense to me.
What is NOT a poetry can not be a *kind* of poetry.
May be you wanted to say poetry and 'lifeless scrambled
imitation'.
Further coinages like 'akavithai' don't appear 'neat'.
[ al+ kavithai is fine but seems to lack 'uyir' ]
I think there is kavithai and kuppai.
[ some kuppai might glitter a bit and some beggars
might use it for something, but still it is kuppai; some
of these beggars might be in sahitya academy too :-) ]
> allaadhadhu (or) akavidhai). Who has to decide that?. In my opinion,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> only time will decide that. Can we keep waiting till then?. We have to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> come to our own judgements, based on our knowledge. We have to keep
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Who has to decide ? well, there is no one person or group
that can decide, but often healthy criticism and sincere
art-lovers and connoisseurs can help those interested
in poetry to appreciate.. and the value, quality
and the depth and richness - all get appreciated slowly
over time. But often, length of time is not the one which decides
the quality-value-richness-depth etc. but rather the number of
healthy criticisms and their validity endorsed by art-loving
folks.. and this can happen in a span of two years or 100 years..
again the readership also matters.. sahithya academy awards
don't decide.. but if sahithya academy is an honest body
truly or largely interested in the qual-value-ri-depth issues,
then its recognition will aid to spread the message to
other art lovers..
> reading more and more. More we read better will be our judgement.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> So it will be a good idea to share the poetry we are familiar with,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> even as we discuss, "what is poetry?".
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I agree that reading more will help to _familarize_ with
poetry but not necessarily appreciate or judge poetry..
because these things depend upon inner developments and
the sensitivity of the persons involved. If a person moves
his/her hands here and there, it can not become a dance..
but even a single motion can be perceived as dance-like
if the artistic sensitivity is developed inside the perceiving
individual....
A suffering seen in a fellow being can not be felt
if there is no compasion in heart.. it can not come
by reading more poetry.. the inner blossoming
( increased compassion, sensitivity, honesty, intelligence..)
matters a lot.
>
>
> =================
> iRudhi vaarththai
> =================
> - Cheran
[ Cheran's kavithai deleted]
>
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
anbudan
-Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
>In article <2C27EA2...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>> The proposal of 'kavidhaip pOtti' ended in the crisis now - we got into
>> the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I honestly differ. The first requirement for understanding
> poetry is to understand the mysterious relationship between
> form and content !!! Neither the content nor the form
> by itself is sufficient for a good poetry, but togather yes.
> Feeling is indeed enshrined in the relationship between the
> form and content.
If I said "form AND contents".
>
>> only two kind: (1) Poetry (kavidhai) and (2) non-poetry (kavidhai
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> allaadhadhu (or) akavidhai). Who has to decide that?. In my opinion,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> This sounds rather silly to me [ no offense meant]
> You are saying 'as far as poetry is concerned, there can be
> only two kinds..' and one of them is non-poetry ??!!
> It does not make any sense to me.
Ok. I should have put the word poetry in quotes or said 'the issue
of poetry'.
> What is NOT a poetry can not be a *kind* of poetry.
> May be you wanted to say poetry and 'lifeless scrambled
> imitation'.
> Further coinages like 'akavithai' don't appear 'neat'.
> [ al+ kavithai is fine but seems to lack 'uyir' ]
> I think there is kavithai and kuppai.
> [ some kuppai might glitter a bit and some beggars
> might use it for something, but still it is kuppai; some
> of these beggars might be in sahitya academy too :-) ]
adhavadhu 'kavidhai', kavidhai pOla paasnagu kaattuvadhu. I tried
to put in a decent way rather than calling the second kind 'kuppai'.
>
>> allaadhadhu (or) akavidhai). Who has to decide that?. In my opinion,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> only time will decide that. Can we keep waiting till then?. We have to
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> come to our own judgements, based on our knowledge. We have to keep
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Who has to decide ? well, there is no one person or group
> that can decide, but often healthy criticism and sincere
> art-lovers and connoisseurs can help those interested
> in poetry to appreciate.. and the value, quality
> and the depth and richness - all get appreciated slowly
> over time. But often, length of time is not the one which decides
> the quality-value-richness-depth etc. but rather the number of
> healthy criticisms and their validity endorsed by art-loving
> folks.. and this can happen in a span of two years or 100 years..
> again the readership also matters.. sahithya academy awards
> don't decide.. but if sahithya academy is an honest body
> truly or largely interested in the qual-value-ri-depth issues,
> then its recognition will aid to spread the message to
> other art lovers..
>
When I said, 'time', I didn't mean lock them in a box and see it if
they are still poetic after 50 years or so. I don't think 'poetry'
is like wine that can be seasoned.
I meant more or less what you elaborated. It has to be time tested.
Critics as well as the readers will decide its fate over years. So
I meant, it cannot be decided by one individual or institution.
nalla kavidhai niRkum - varunkaalaththiRku nEradiyaana payanpaattuth
thanmai illaavidinum, kavidhai enRa aLavilaavadhu. kavidhai allaadhadhu
kaala veLLaththil adithtukoNdu pOyvidum. To give examples from
the recent past who wrote 'yaappuk kavidhai' (I intentionally avoid
the term 'marabu kavidhai'), Ramalinga Vallalar, Bharathi and
Bharathidasan. Others, in my opinion, simply faded away from our
(at least in my) memory, even if we mugged up from school text books.
>
>
>> reading more and more. More we read better will be our judgement.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> So it will be a good idea to share the poetry we are familiar with,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> even as we discuss, "what is poetry?".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I agree that reading more will help to _familarize_ with
> poetry but not necessarily appreciate or judge poetry..
> because these things depend upon inner developments and
> the sensitivity of the persons involved. If a person moves
> his/her hands here and there, it can not become a dance..
> but even a single motion can be perceived as dance-like
> if the artistic sensitivity is developed inside the perceiving
> individual....
> A suffering seen in a fellow being can not be felt
> if there is no compasion in heart.. it can not come
> by reading more poetry.. the inner blossoming
> ( increased compassion, sensitivity, honesty, intelligence..)
> matters a lot.
Why would one bother about reading poetry, unless, one has the
appreciation to the art of poetry?. I did not mean those who are
not interested in poetry. I was only talking about the interested
people. Others, simply read text books, write exams and forget.
>>
>>
>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
>
> anbudan
> -Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
"kavidhaiyai purindhuk koNdaarum
puriyaadhaarum
kaaRRai purindhuk koNdaaraa!
kaaRRaip paRRiya bayam
vaLara vaLara
'oxygen' enRu peyarittu
'cylinder'gaLil adaiththu
................"
- Kalapriya
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>In article <C931p...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>>In article <2C27EA2...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>>> The proposal of 'kavidhaip pOtti' ended in the crisis now - we got into
>>> the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> I honestly differ. The first requirement for understanding
>> poetry is to understand the mysterious relationship between
>> form and content !!! Neither the content nor the form
>> by itself is sufficient for a good poetry, but togather yes.
>> Feeling is indeed enshrined in the relationship between the
>> form and content.
>
> If I said "form AND contents".
I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean 'had you (sundara
moorthy) said 'form AND contents' your view will be
same as what I say above ? No, I don't think so.
Well, what I meant was the 'time' factor depends on
[1] the _number_ of quality criticizers
[2] real physical time during which the 'values'
of a society get modified. For example
peNNadimai, maraththai-vettuvathum-naduvathum,
... In other words sensitivity of a certain issue
changes with time and hence the intesity of the
feelings expressed will be variously perceived.
>
> I meant more or less what you elaborated. It has to be time tested.
> Critics as well as the readers will decide its fate over years. So
> I meant, it cannot be decided by one individual or institution.
>
> nalla kavidhai niRkum - varunkaalaththiRku nEradiyaana payanpaattuth
> thanmai illaavidinum, kavidhai enRa aLavilaavadhu. kavidhai allaadhadhu
> kaala veLLaththil adithtukoNdu pOyvidum. To give examples from
> the recent past who wrote 'yaappuk kavidhai' (I intentionally avoid
> the term 'marabu kavidhai'), Ramalinga Vallalar, Bharathi and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ramalinga vaLLalaaraip pOla paattu ezhuthiyavar
aNmaiyil yaarumE illai ena solluvEn. aanaal
aazham aLappaRiyathu.. soRchuvaiyaik kooda kaNippathu
kadinam. ivarudaiya paadalgaL , (kaattaaga
'arutperum cOthi') paravalaaga makkaL aRiyaathathu
migavum varundhath thakkathu.
thaayumaanavar, pattinaththaar sila nooRRaaNdukaLukku
munnar vaazhndhavargaL ( iruvarum 4000 varigaLukku mEl
ezhuthiyuLLanar). ivargaLum 'iRaimai' paRRiyE
paadiyuLLanar. A.D. 1200kku piRagu 'iRaimai'
paRRiya paadalgaLE EraaLam. piRa paattudaith
thalaippugaL migavum arugivittathu pOla therigiRathu.
( aanaalum, aaraaichchi paRRaathu enbathu en
thanik_karuththu)
> Bharathidasan. Others, in my opinion, simply faded away from our
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Have you read perunchiththanaar's 'nooRaasiRiyam'
'aiyai' ? ponnadiyaan used to be very good...
I think this impression that Barathi, Bharathidaasan
as main figures is mostly political, or lack of honest
research efforts. I am almost sure there were
many who rivalled these poets.. this I'm saying based
on the exclusive 'kavithai-Edu's I was aware of
in the late 1960s. ( for example Ponnadiyaan's
'mullaich charam'..)
> (at least in my) memory, even if we mugged up from school text books.
>
>
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
> "kavidhaiyai purindhuk koNdaarum
> puriyaadhaarum
> kaaRRai purindhuk koNdaaraa!
>
> kaaRRaip paRRiya bayam
> vaLara vaLara
> 'oxygen' enRu peyarittu
> 'cylinder'gaLil adaiththu
> ................"
>
> - Kalapriya
anbudan
-Selvaa
Kathiravan Krishnamurthi
>> nalla kavidhai niRkum - varunkaalaththiRku nEradiyaana payanpaattuth
>> thanmai illaavidinum, kavidhai enRa aLavilaavadhu. kavidhai allaadhadhu
>> kaala veLLaththil adithtukoNdu pOyvidum. To give examples from
>> the recent past who wrote 'yaappuk kavidhai' (I intentionally avoid
>> the term 'marabu kavidhai'), Ramalinga Vallalar, Bharathi and
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Ramalinga vaLLalaaraip pOla paattu ezhuthiyavar
> aNmaiyil yaarumE illai ena solluvEn. aanaal
> aazham aLappaRiyathu.. soRchuvaiyaik kooda kaNippathu
> kadinam. ivarudaiya paadalgaL , (kaattaaga
> 'arutperum cOthi') paravalaaga makkaL aRiyaathathu
> migavum varundhath thakkathu.
raamalinga vaLLalaar paadal onRu
***********************************
There has been a lot of discussing about
form and feelings in poems. I request
selvaa and or sundar to explain for the benefit of
nettors taking as an example the following
kavithai of vaLLalaar. I think that will
give us a lot more understanding of
a lot of technical discussion's going on.
I have a very good feeling for this poem.
So I chose this. I do know the
meaning. But there are technicalities
as well.
athil uLLa uyirai thaangaL eduththu viLakkinaal
nanmaiyaaka irukkum.
How sweet is the Lord. Sweet like honey. More
How much more. You will get sated with Honey.
But the Lord's fame is sweeter than honey and
this is described as follows:
"thaniththani mukkani pizhinthu vadiththonRaakak koottich
sarkkaraiyum kaRkkaNdin podiyumikak kalanthE
thaniththa naRunthEn peithu pasumpaalum thEngkin
thanippaalum sErththoru theemparupidiyum viravi
ininththa naRuneiyaLanthE iLaNYsoottin iRakki
eduththa suvaikkattiyinum iniththidunth theLLamudhE!"
-vaLLalaar
Ultimate connoissuer.
ps: All vaLLalaar songs can be sung. But they are
not sung commonly. He is mostly secular.
anban
kathiravan
M. Sundaramoorthy
>In article <2C2899...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>>In article <C931p...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>>>In article <2C27EA2...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>>>> The proposal of 'kavidhaip pOtti' ended in the crisis now - we got into
>>>> the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>> the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>
>>> I honestly differ. The first requirement for understanding
>>> poetry is to understand the mysterious relationship between
>>> form and content !!! Neither the content nor the form
>>> by itself is sufficient for a good poetry, but togather yes.
>>> Feeling is indeed enshrined in the relationship between the
>>> form and content.
>>
>> If I said "form AND contents".
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean 'had you (sundara
> moorthy) said 'form AND contents' your view will be
> same as what I say above ? No, I don't think so.
If I said "only form AND contents" rather than "form or contents",
your arguement to refute me is correct.
>
>> Bharathidasan. Others, in my opinion, simply faded away from our
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Have you read perunchiththanaar's 'nooRaasiRiyam'
> 'aiyai' ? ponnadiyaan used to be very good...
When I say something, I say only based on what I know. I don't
want to assume that what I haven't read are 'kuppai'.
I might have read some of perunchiththanaar's 'ceyyuLs', in some
magazines, like Va. Mu. Sedhuraman's 'thamizhppaNi', when I was
a strong 'thaniththamizh' fan. I don't remember any of those I
read in such magazines. If you can post some of their poems we
can discuss.
> I think this impression that Barathi, Bharathidaasan
> as main figures is mostly political, or lack of honest
> research efforts.
perunchiththanaar is also political. He is a staunch Tamil
Nationalist. But I his poetry is not talked about, probably outside
his circle.
> I am almost sure there were
> many who rivalled these poets.. this I'm saying based
> on the exclusive 'kavithai-Edu's I was aware of
> in the late 1960s. ( for example Ponnadiyaan's
> 'mullaich charam'..)
Where are they now?. If you think they are as good as Bharathi and
Bharathidasan why are they not known to even a small fraction of the
people who know these two?. Politics may not be the only reason. There
must be something else that has to do with poetry.
Do the 'ceyyuL' writers Suradha, iLandhEvan, vaa.mu. Sedhuraman
etc come in this category? I simply can't stand them now. If it
sounds too arrogant, take it as my personal opinion.
>>
>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
>
> anbudan
> Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
P.S: I may not be able to continue on this thread.
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
[I've deleted 4 lines which merely points to article refs]
>>>>> The proposal of 'kavidhaip pOtti' ended in the crisis now - we got into
>>>>> the debate of "what is poetry?". The poetry need not be decided based on
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>> the form or contents. As far as the poetry is concerned, there can be
>>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>
>>>> I honestly differ. The first requirement for understanding
>>>> poetry is to understand the mysterious relationship between
>>>> form and content !!! Neither the content nor the form
>>>> by itself is sufficient for a good poetry, but togather yes.
>>>> Feeling is indeed enshrined in the relationship between the
>>>> form and content.
>>>
>>> If I said "form AND contents".
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean 'had you (sundara
>> moorthy) said 'form AND contents' your view will be
>> same as what I say above ? No, I don't think so.
>
> If I said "only form AND contents" rather than "form or contents",
> your arguement to refute me is correct.
I've left your words and my words for english
knowing nettors to decide for themselves.
If you've meant the same as I've written, then
thats fine, then I've nothing to refute there.
>>
>>> Bharathidasan. Others, in my opinion, simply faded away from our
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> Have you read perunchiththanaar's 'nooRaasiRiyam'
>> 'aiyai' ? ponnadiyaan used to be very good...
>
> When I say something, I say only based on what I know. I don't
> want to assume that what I haven't read are 'kuppai'.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Let me explain what I meant by kuppai.
othukki thaLLavENdiyathu. valindhu izhivu kuRikka
kuppai enRu solla villai; uyir illaatha 'kavithaiyai'
ennum peyaril uLLathai, othukki thaLLa vENdiyathai
enna enRu solvathu. naan muthalil 'kasadu' ena solla
ninaiththEn, aanaal 'kasadu, maasu, maruvu, aasu..' muthaliya
soRkaLukku poruL theriyaamal palar irukkalaam ( aNmaiyil
'maasu il veenai' enbathaRku poruL kEttaargaL;
'vEyuRu thOLi pangan..' enum thEvaarap paattil
'aasu aRu' enRu vandha pathaththiRkku 'kuRRam illaa' ennum
poruL kooda theriya villai oru silarkku..) enavE
'koottith thaLLa vENdiya' payanaRRathu enRa poruLil
'kuppai' ena kooRinEn. ramaNa maharishi 'puththagangaLai
kuppai enRu sonnaar oru pozhuthu oru kaaraNaththiRku;
ingu viLakkap pugundhaal neeNdu vidum...
I did NOT use in the sense 'what I don't know is kuppai' !!
I think you've not understood my words. kutharkka poruL
koNduLLeer !
>
> I might have read some of perunchiththanaar's 'ceyyuLs', in some
> magazines, like Va. Mu. Sedhuraman's 'thamizhppaNi', when I was
> a strong 'thaniththamizh' fan. I don't remember any of those I
> read in such magazines. If you can post some of their poems we
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> can discuss.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Unfortunately, I don't have any of his poems here, but
I had( and still must be having) a fair number in India
( collected between 1970-1975 ). perunchithiranaar is a
poet no less than Bharathi or Bharathidaasan, quite
arguably significantly better than both. But he was
not catholic as Bharathi and he can be classed more with
bharathidaasan in view of his political views.
perunchithiranaar was supportive of separation of tamil naadu
like so many others which obviously is *seriously* ill founded;
but the issues he discussed while supporting a separatism
were valid ones although his solution is ill-founded.
Few can equal his writing style ( iLankumaran is the only one
I am aware of who can equal or even better)
but his work 'nooRaasiriyam' is nothing to do with political
views ( it was on 'akaththuRai' paadalkaL).
>
>> I think this impression that Barathi, Bharathidaasan
>> as main figures is mostly political, or lack of honest
>> research efforts.
>
> perunchiththanaar is also political. He is a staunch Tamil
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
See above my comments.
> Nationalist. But I his poetry is not talked about, probably outside
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> his circle.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes, this is essentially correct but it does not mean that
his poetry is of less than bharathi or bharathidaasan.
Asokamitran and 'kaNaiyaazhi' fans were also a small
circle.. If you ask an average tamil guy/gal he can not
sing more than one or two songs of bharathidaasan and may be
4-5 of bharathi. But these _names_ are well known.
Probably there are more bengalis reading tagore than tamils
reading bharathi. The popular songs of bharathi-bahrathidaasan
are due to cinema and school/college text-book effects..
A couple of other poets are known because of media
and 'political' support. If there is an 'honorable'
literary forum where 'quality' of work is discussed in an
unbiased manner many of the poets we are familiar with might
take a back seat !
>
>> I am almost sure there were
>> many who rivalled these poets.. this I'm saying based
>> on the exclusive 'kavithai-Edu's I was aware of
>> in the late 1960s. ( for example Ponnadiyaan's
>> 'mullaich charam'..)
>
> Where are they now?. If you think they are as good as Bharathi and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Bharathidasan why are they not known to even a small fraction of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> people who know these two?. Politics may not be the only reason. There
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> must be something else that has to do with poetry.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Where ? I don't know. I've not been keeping track of for
many years now. In my opinion some of them are absolute
golds and gems ( collectors treasures). Yes, I'm sure
many of them are no less than bharathi and bharathidaasan and
a few of them are in my opinion significantly better than these.
I won't use 'popularity' as a measure of quality of work as
you seem to imply !
You are vaguely saying about 'something to do with poetry'..
Well, I would dare say that their lack of popularity is
nothing to do with poetry or its quality. I agree politics
might not be the only factor, but other factors are equally
despicable.
>
> Do the 'ceyyuL' writers Suradha, iLandhEvan, vaa.mu. Sedhuraman
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> etc come in this category? I simply can't stand them now. If it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No. 'thamizhppaNi' nadaththiya 'perum pulavar' ena
azhaikkappadum vaa.mu. pOnROrum alla.
surathaa'vin padaippugaLai aNmaiyil paarkka villai.
avarudaiya pazhaiya padaippugaL ennai kavarndhathu
illai. iLandhEvan kavithai Ethum manathil ninRathu illai.
> sounds too arrogant, take it as my personal opinion.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sure. So too mine. I can't take vast majority of
'poems'.. just my opinion.
>
>>>
>>> M. Sundaramoorthy
>>> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>>
>>
>> anbudan
>> Selvaa
>
> M. Sundaramoorthy
> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
>
> P.S: I may not be able to continue on this thread.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thats fine. I've registered my views.
>
anbudan
-Selvaa
S. Sankarapandi
In article <2C29341...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M
. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>In article <C93Jx...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>>
>> Have you read perunchiththanaar's 'nooRaasiRiyam'
>> 'aiyai' ? ponnadiyaan used to be very good...
>
> When I say something, I say only based on what I know. I don't
> want to assume that what I haven't read are 'kuppai'.
>
> I might have read some of perunchiththanaar's 'ceyyuLs', in some
> magazines, like Va. Mu. Sedhuraman's 'thamizhppaNi', when I was
> a strong 'thaniththamizh' fan. I don't remember any of those I
> read in such magazines. If you can post some of their poems we
> can discuss.
>
Though I have not read any collection of poems by perunchiththiranaar, I
subscribed to the magazine from `ulakath thamizhar munnERRa kazhagam' for
sometime when I WAS also a fan of `Tamil revivalism'. In those days, those
poems written by perunchiththiranar were very emotional and appealing to me.
Now, if I want to assess him on the basis of those kavidhais, I would say that
they were all just false rhetorics to brainwash Tamils who believe that Tamil
nationalism has been suppressed in the name of Indian nationalism (there is
some element of truth in the latter). No offence meant for perunchithiranar
since I dont know him personnally.
In my opinion, such Tamil revivalists cause greater damage for the real
development of Tamil and all their definition of language, poetry, literature,
art or history are just a mirror image of the Hindutvam and brahminism.
btw, puthukkavidhai also has some `ilakkaNam', though it is not
`yaappilakkaNam'. I recommend reading two books,
1. `puthukkavidhaiyum puthuppirakgnaiyum by Bala
2. inthak kaalak kavidhai uthithikaL by Subha Veerapandian
These are not the exclusive list but they talk about the `ilakkaNam' in terms
of mOnai, muraN, ankatham, poruL etc. Sundar may have more good references.
So there is nothing like which one (yaappuk kavidhai or puthukkavidhai) is
easier than the other one.
--
S. Sankarapandi
ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering
>In article <2C29341...@news.service.uci.edu> sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu (M
>. Sundaramoorthy) writes:
>>In article <C93Jx...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> selv...@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (
>C.R.Selvakumar - Electrical Engineering) writes:
>>>
>> I might have read some of perunchiththanaar's 'ceyyuLs', in some
>> magazines, like Va. Mu. Sedhuraman's 'thamizhppaNi', when I was
>> a strong 'thaniththamizh' fan. I don't remember any of those I
>> read in such magazines. If you can post some of their poems we
>> can discuss.
>>
>
> Though I have not read any collection of poems by perunchiththiranaar, I
>subscribed to the magazine from `ulakath thamizhar munnERRa kazhagam' for
>sometime when I WAS also a fan of `Tamil revivalism'. In those days, those
>poems written by perunchiththiranar were very emotional and appealing to me.
>Now, if I want to assess him on the basis of those kavidhais, I would say that
>they were all just false rhetorics to brainwash Tamils who believe that Tamil
Assess what ? You may not agree with a viewpoint but
assessment should not be based on ones 'current' political views.
To you it may be false rhetorics, but to the poet it might
have been what he felt. If you are an atheist and if you can
not see the feelings expressed in 'thEvaaram, thiruvaasagam,
thiruvarutpaa..' etc. can you call it 'false rhetorics' ?!!
>nationalism has been suppressed in the name of Indian nationalism (there is
>some element of truth in the latter). No offence meant for perunchithiranar
>since I dont know him personnally.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you knew him 'offence would have been meant' ?!
>
> In my opinion, such Tamil revivalists cause greater damage for the real
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>development of Tamil and all their definition of language, poetry, literature,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You're confusing issues. We are only discussing
poetry not politics.
>art or history are just a mirror image of the Hindutvam and brahminism.
>
> btw, puthukkavidhai also has some `ilakkaNam', though it is not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>`yaappilakkaNam'. I recommend reading two books,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Please read my other reply to your post. Aha! puthuk
kavithai _also_ has ilakkaNam ! Why this inferiority
complex ?! Who said that because yaappu has ilakkaNam
it is superior ?! I'll tell my opinion, why 'puthuk kavithai'
is popular in some circles. First, no need for
learning yaappu ilakkaNam ( btw they are not fixed as you
seem to imagine), secondly, to start with the
proponents used _simple_ easily understandable words
which a _common_ man can understand, thirdly though not
lastly, the puthuk kavithai fellows can dismiss older
works as 'conservative, archaic..' to gain leverage.
( no need to be compared to the vast collection of gems,
so relatively, their work may be looking better).
In any case, please read the other reply i gave before
responding to this. Puthuk kavithai writers and readers
have lots of misunderstanding of what is poetry and thats
the main problem ( this true of yaappuk kavithai as well).
For certain effects, puthuk kavithai will not be suitable
and similarly for certain effects yaappuk kavithai will not
be suitable. A more regular sandham is essential for may
effects ( not all) in some other situations freedom from
sandham is equally important. Without understanding, many
write and criticise - just my perception, may be wrong.
>
>1. `puthukkavidhaiyum puthuppirakgnaiyum by Bala
>2. inthak kaalak kavidhai uthithikaL by Subha Veerapandian
>
>These are not the exclusive list but they talk about the `ilakkaNam' in terms
>of mOnai, muraN, ankatham, poruL etc. Sundar may have more good references.
>
> So there is nothing like which one (yaappuk kavidhai or puthukkavidhai) is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>easier than the other one.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes there is ! Read my other reply. May I ask why should it be
important which is more difficult, did you pause to think ?
uyir oottuthal iru vagaik kavithaikaLilum oththa idarppaadE.
aanaalum yaappuk *kavithai* ezhuthuvathu, puthuk kavithai
ezhuthuvathaik kaatilum kadinam. ethu kadinam enbathu ennaip
poruththa aLivilE payan aRRa kELvi. oruvar 'violin' vaasiththaal,
isai irukkiRathaa enRu paarppeeraa allathu niRaiya kadinamaana
'jigu-bugu' izhuththaargaL enRu kaNipeeraa ?
>--
>S. Sankarapandi
>ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
anbudan
-Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
>In article <20d1lf$r...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (S. Sankarapandi) writes:
>
>>
>> In my opinion, such Tamil revivalists cause greater damage for the real
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>development of Tamil and all their definition of language, poetry, literature,
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You're confusing issues. We are only discussing
> poetry not politics.
Let us try to be honest here. You also attributed the success of
Bharathi and Bharathidasan to politics, while talking about poetry.
Let us not forget that, in this century, language and literature were
inseparably mixed with politics in Tamil Nadu. I don't mind that
either as long as that was done in honest way in the best interests
of the people. But what happened was the exactly opposit. And you
cannot expect others stop criticising such destructive forces whether
we talk about poetry or politics as long as they had put their hands
in it.
>
>>art or history are just a mirror image of the Hindutvam and brahminism.
>>
>> btw, puthukkavidhai also has some `ilakkaNam', though it is not
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>`yaappilakkaNam'. I recommend reading two books,
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Please read my other reply to your post. Aha! puthuk
> kavithai _also_ has ilakkaNam ! Why this inferiority
I could not resist laughing back. What makes you think it doesn't
have ilakkaNam?. How do you distinguish it from the others forms
of writing then?. If you assume 'ilakkaNam' means only what is
written in 'tholkaappiyam', 'yaaparunkalak_kaarigai' or 'nannool',
you may not find ilakkaNam for free verses, which is 20th century
concept as far as Tamil is concerned. Of course, we always have
some Pundits (in FFT's terminology, 'langots') who would claim that
we had the so called pudhukkavidhai in Sangam period. (For your
information, Ponmani Vairamuthu's Ph.D. thesis is 'sanga ilakkiyaththil
pudhukkavidhai kooRugaL'. One of the 'kooRu' is that in many Sangam
poems 'asiriyappaa' rules are not followed strictly. This reason
sounds like a joke to me. After all, 'yaappilakkaNam' rules were fixed
much later based on the writings written thus far. Correct me if I am
wrong).
Free verses do not have thEmaangaay, puLimaangaay rules and that
is why they are called free verses. However, they DO have some
intrinsic rules that are important for all the free verses and
many others rules that depend on how innovative and skillful the
poet is. One of the important rule is the crispness - that a poem
should not contain unwanted words. A word that doesn't contribute
to the poetry have no place in the poem. Maximum effect should
be buried with a minimum and most effective words. To put in
Ezra Pound's words, 'each word should be loaded with maximum meaning
and effect'. As more and more unwanted words come in, the poem gets
diluted and ultimately loses the status as a poem. (This is what happens
in many of the 'yappuk kavidhais', particularly those written now.)
The poet should not tell everything as the reader has the responsibilty
of developing as much meaning as he can. (uNmaiyaana kavidhai
vaasaganukku 'kOnaar' thEvaiyillai). Let me give an example.
selvaththuL selvam sevich chelvam; achchelvam
selvaththuL ellaam thalai.
This kuRal conforms to the rules of 'kuRal veNpaa'. If Valluvar
is to write free verse now, he wouldn't waste so many words to convey
the message. He would simple say,
selvaththuL selvam
sevich chelvam.
The rest is redundant. A poem shouldn't have this redundancy.
> ........ Why this inferiority
> complex ?! Who said that because yaappu has ilakkaNam
> it is superior ?!
Yes, good question?. Who said so?. Is it your imagination to bring
the inferior-superior idea to poetry?. I don't think anyone argued
in this net something is superior or inferior.
> I'll tell my opinion, why 'puthuk kavithai'
> is popular in some circles. First, no need for
> learning yaappu ilakkaNam ( btw they are not fixed as you
> seem to imagine), secondly, to start with the
This is a real joke. It doesn't take a long time to mug up 'nEr nEr
thEmaa' rules (whether are they fixed or not), if that is really a basic
requirement for poetry or there is a legislation that demands prosody
in poetry. After all, most of us who had studied Tamil upto College
level had studied basic 'yaappilakkaNam'. You seem to imagine people who want to write 'pudhukkavidhai' are lazy to study 'yaappilakkaNam',
I give you examples which show it is not true - 'marabukkavidhaiyil'
vEr pidiththu 'pudhukkavidhaiyil' kani paarththa Abdul Rahman,
Inquilab, Meera, Puviyarasu, Agniputhiran (and there are plenty),
who studied and teach 'yappilakkaNam'. Do you think they chose to
write 'pudhukkavidhai' because of laziness?. Given that there is
rythm in some of the poems and their poetic skills, they can write
much better poems than the 'ceyyuL' writers like Ki.Va. Jagannathan,
Va.Mu.Sedhuraman, Ilandevan etc, only if they think 'yaappilakkaNam'
is a better and more effective form of poetic expression.
> secondly, to start with the
> proponents used _simple_ easily understandable words
> which a _common_ man can understand,
Then, why the heck some Pundits are still holding on the 'yaappu'?
They should dump it and join the mainstream if they are really
concerned about poetry reaching the mass lest they will be dumped
by the people, which, anyways, is happening.
> thirdly though not
> lastly, the puthuk kavithai fellows can dismiss older
> works as 'conservative, archaic..' to gain leverage.
This is a baseless charge. They don't dismiss the older works
at all. What they dissmiss is only the imitation of such
old works by neo-Pundits and sterotype writings, to claim
they are following 'marabu', by writing 'marabu kavidhai' (which is
obviously a misnomer. This name might have come into usage because,
the concept of free verse is imported from West and the Pundits would
have thought writing in Tamil prosody is following 'marabu')
More than writing stereotype 'ceyyuLs' these Pundits
even seem to imagine they are the gaurdians of Tamil literature.
> ( no need to be compared to the vast collection of gems,
> so relatively, their work may be looking better).
I don't understand what you mean here. Can you please eloborate?
> In any case, please read the other reply i gave before
> responding to this. Puthuk kavithai writers and readers
> have lots of misunderstanding of what is poetry and thats
> the main problem ( this true of yaappuk kavithai as well).
This is exactly true with the lovers of so called 'marabu kavidhai',
many of whom dismiss the free verses outright, for a stupid reason -
that they don't conform to prosody. What they are look for is just
the form, not the poetics. On the other hand the lovers of the so
called 'pudhukkavidhai' don't reject verses based on the form alone.
Show me a 'pudhukkavidhai' lover, who rejects Bharathi or Bharathidasan
or Vallalar or Sangam poems, just based on the form alone. (Don't
point out some 'ceyyuL' writers don't get attention - that must
have to do with poetics, not form).
> For certain effects, puthuk kavithai will not be suitable
> and similarly for certain effects yaappuk kavithai will not
> be suitable. A more regular sandham is essential for may
> effects ( not all) in some other situations freedom from
> sandham is equally important. Without understanding, many
> write and criticise - just my perception, may be wrong.
The only effect seems to me is a musical aspect. Yes lyrics cannot
be composed with the new technique. But remember there is a difference
between a poem and lyric. Otherwise, whatever the effect yaappu can
bring in a oem can be done by the new technique as well, only if
written by a good poet. I don't know if any critic writes against
'isaippaadalgaL'. What they might criticise is the claims that
prosodical verses are poems.
>>
>>1. `puthukkavidhaiyum puthuppirakgnaiyum by Bala
>>2. inthak kaalak kavidhai uthithikaL by Subha Veerapandian
>>
>>These are not the exclusive list but they talk about the `ilakkaNam' in terms
>>of mOnai, muraN, ankatham, poruL etc. Sundar may have more good references.
>>
>> So there is nothing like which one (yaappuk kavidhai or puthukkavidhai) is
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>easier than the other one.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Yes there is ! Read my other reply. May I ask why should it be
> important which is more difficult, did you pause to think ?
> uyir oottuthal iru vagaik kavithaikaLilum oththa idarppaadE.
> aanaalum yaappuk *kavithai* ezhuthuvathu, puthuk kavithai
> ezhuthuvathaik kaatilum kadinam. ethu kadinam enbathu ennaip
> poruththa aLivilE payan aRRa kELvi. oruvar 'violin' vaasiththaal,
> isai irukkiRathaa enRu paarppeeraa allathu niRaiya kadinamaana
> 'jigu-bugu' izhuththaargaL enRu kaNipeeraa ?
Selva you seem to be confused here. Not only you are attributing your
own views to others, but criticise also. As far as I remember,
Sankarapandi didn't say one is easier than the other and that is an
important issue at all to talk about. In fact he say exactly the
opposite - it is not important which is easier or difficult. On the
other hand you repeatedly say writing 'yaappuk kavidhai' is more
difficult and shout at others also on the same point, though he never
said so.
>>--
>>S. Sankarapandi
>>ssan...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
> anbudan
> -Selvaa
M. Sundaramoorthy
sun...@indigo1.hsis.uci.edu
"kavidhai emadhu thozhil, (adhaavdhu vaasippadhu)"
P.S: Want to continue, but may not be able to keep the pace.